Wisconsin Rules Roughshod against Historic Religious Beliefs

Jan 1

Posted by admin in NAIS, Rant | No Comments

from – National Assn of Farm Animal Welfare – Dec. 31, 2009

Ag.Ed@nafaw.org

A hotly contested court case centered on a farmers’ religious beliefs is now in the hands of a judge. Last week, Clark County District Attorney Darwin Zwieg filed his final brief in a case that jousts the state of Wisconsin against the historic religious convictions of Amish Christians.

On behalf of Miller, the court appointed Bonnie Walksmuth to present his case. Amish Christians normally shun court conflicts and are known for their peaceful humble demeanor. Thousands of immigrants fled Europe to settle in Wisconsin and the US to find safety for their religious freedoms. Now, as the court room was filled with concerned and broken-hearted Amish, an era of freedom was at high risk.

In Wisconsin v. Emanuel Miller Jr., Zwieg alleges the area farmer stands in violation of a new state law requiring all properties where livestock exist be registered with the state. Miller admits as much, but testifies the rule infringes on his religious beliefs. According to testimony during an evidentiary hearing in the matter, those in Miller’s faith fear eternal damnation if they abide by the law, which they feel is a pre-cursor to the biblical ‘Mark of the Beast.’ The issue is not an Amish only conviction, but also shared by Bible believers of many denominations.

Not just a new pestiferous state regulation, but a historic way of life was put on trial in Neillsville, Wisconsin. Miller was charged under complaint for civil forfeiture because he refused to surrender his life holdings into the state’s NAIS property enrollment surveillance system.

The DA says the state has a compelling interest to promote food and animal safety, human health and the economy of the state of Wisconsin. He points to testimony from DATCP employees, who stated mandatory premise ID could improve their ability to respond to an animal disease.

Dr. Paul McGraw, head of the Wisconsin Animal Health Dept. of Ag. was questioned, under oath, by Judge Counsell regarding the necessity of the premise registration system and whether the rule had shown to be a benefit to disease control in Wisconsin to which Dr. McGraw responded, “No”. The judge asked if it had been a benefit in any other state implemented and again, “No”.

In his brief, Zwieg notes a sincerely held religious belief should not give any Wisconsin resident the ability to refuse enforcements and regulations of the new state law. Zwieg crudely compares sincere Christians with corrupt cults of history to make the point that religious beliefs are not of any real consideration to the state of Wisconsin. The DATCP in Wisconsin was aware of the historic Bible beliefs of devout Christians and considered it a minor issue when laws were created to demand property enrollments.

Wisconsin enforces a mandatory NAIS although USDA on a federal level remains quasi voluntary for NAIS enrollment. At 16 recent listening sessions held by USDA Sec. Vilsack, over 90% of attendees opposed any form of government enforced animal ID. Nation wide the proposed NAIS program has been considered the worst idea, with the least proven value in USDA history. Basically, the NAIS, as proposed, is dead as a voluntary national program. The spark of life still exists in Wisconsin.

The state of Wisconsin is fulfilling their agreements with USDA to enforce state mandatory NAIS. The Wisconsin Dept. of Agriculture, Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium, and the Wisconsin Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection has received cooperative agreements totaling over 13 million dollars during a period from 2002 through 2009. According to state surveillance records there are 51,373 livestock properties in Wisconsin with 61,507 registered, to date, showing 119.7% in compliance. An estimated 7,320 have refused to surrender properties to the mandatory ruling.

As a result of Judge Counsell’s decision, either the religious folk in Wisconsin will be incarcerated by the hundreds, or they will break down their beliefs and be shattered by the state like a stomped soda can! The other option is for the state of Wisconsin to return the $13,000,000 to USDA. Go figure?

Attorney Walksmuth, representing Miller has already filed her final brief. The case now goes to Clark County Circuit Court Judge Jon Counsell for consideration.

Thanks to Brad Headtel, Marti Oakley and The PPJ Gazette.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

NAIS: Life Support ~~ Dead on Arrival

Dec 29

Posted by admin in Food, NAIS | No Comments

No sooner have most people pronounced NAIS dead-on-arrival, than a number of recent events may have breathed life back into the U.S.A.’s National Animal Identification Scheme. A combination of market forces aligned with a simplified tracking technology, and some rare positive news may have reinvigorated USDA’s moribund, voluntary animal traceability initiative.

First the news headlines. Even though the U.S. House of Representatives had voted to cut off funding for the NAIS as part of the Farm Bill, a joint House-Senate conference committee agreed a few weeks ago to continue funding the program to the tune of $5.3 million for fiscal year 2010-2011. This funding is a reduction from the $14.2 million authorized for last year and less than the $14.6 million the Senate approved, but the program will continue. However, a growing number of Congressional members have made it clear they want to see effective leadership from USDA to dispel some of the more egregious NAIS rumors running unchallenged in the countryside (e.g., backyard farmers with only a few chickens for home use or sale to friends will have to tag and track each animal). They also want to expand the number of farms and ranches that have registered with the NAIS premises database from the current anemic 13% to closer to the 90% needed for an effective national system.

The second piece of news for NAIS supporters is that U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer in Washington, D.C., dismissed a civil suit filed by the Farm-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund and a group of Michigan cattlemen against the USDA and the Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA) over the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). The group’s suit, filed last September, sought to enjoin the implementation and enforcement of NAIS. The suit was dismissed primarily because Judge Collyer ruled the program was voluntarily adopted by state departments of agriculture and was not federally mandated. Should NAIS become mandatory, sorry — the judge has already ruled.

Even with a bit of good news, the large opposition anti-NAIS forces continue to rally their troops by claiming that NAIS is overly burdensome, and is unnecessary because existing livestock records, such as brands, ear tags, veterinary logs and auction barn records do a good and economical job of tracking cattle movements. Dr. George Teagarden, the Kansas state veterinarian, agrees that the current record-keeping system can be used “to find the animals in question, but it can be months after the fact.” According to Dr. Teagarden, this time lag isn’t nearly fast enough and he cautions, “A highly contagious animal disease will devastate this country.” He underscores this dire prediction by noting that in Kansas in a single month cattle from all 48 of the Continental U.S. states arrive at least once a month. The speed of commerce is too fast to be handled by the paper-based system.” Dr. Teagarden is also aware that history does not record any such “devastating” disease to affect Kansas since Foot & Mouth was eliminated in the late twenties. His pandemic prophecy is not a fear to the majority of livestock producers in Kansas or the nation, however those hovering inside the beltway still listen.

Apparently, a number of national governments agree with Dr. Teagarden, and recently several have made or are poised to move their systems from voluntary to mandatory. Within the last few months these key countries have made major moves towards mandatory traceability; moves that are likely to impact USA policy and USA producers.

It is important to understand the difference in other countries. Australia and Canada produce 60% more beef than their country consumes and absolutely must protect and increase export sales. Totally different, the US in 2008, according to the NASS, exported $2,876,906,000 in wholesale beef, but imported $4,764,392,000. For 21 years the US has not produced enough beef to feed the nation. The difference in the urgency to export US beef is drastic. If the US exports more beef, they, in turn must import that exact amount more to feed the nation. In that respect, the US is depending on imports and has no surplus for export at all. All beef export from the US is simply a trading process that does not profit producers, but only those directly related in the selling and buying.

Brazil. Brazil, also producing much more than is being consumed, has just announced that by 2011 all livestock producers will be required to participate in a mandatory traceability system. The new system will rely on simpler technology than the current, voluntary SISBOV system which is RFID-based, and every segment of the Brazilian supply chain, from cow-calf operator to slaughter facility including transporters will be required to provide a complete chain of custody records. Real-time electronic record-keeping is not being mandated, but standardized record-keeping whose data can be transmitted via Internet portals to centralized databases will be used. The SISBOV system will continue to exist for those who want to use it, but the expectation among Brazilian officials is that most producers will use the standardized, simplified paper-based system. On a world export basis, the countries with the most compliance costs will be the least competitive.

Korea. South Korea has instituted a traceback system on domestically raised beef, and has indicated that it would require traceback on imported product by 2010.

Japan. The Japanese government has had a domestic animal identification system in place for several years, and on three different occasions the then-minority political party, the Democratic Party of Japan, had unsuccessfully tried to pass legislation that would require the same level of traceability for imports. In August the DPJ successfully became the controlling party for the first time in a long period, and newly appointed Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has vowed to once again try to revise the Beef Traceability Law. He doesn’t have control of the Upper House of Parliament, but he may be able to persuade his two coalition partners to go along.

How do these foreign government actions impact the U.S. meat industry? The Brazilian action probably has less direct impact on the US than do the Asian actions, because the Brazilian action was aimed at broadening acceptance of Brazilian beef in the EU. There will be some impact, though, because the largest of the Brazilian meat companies, JBS, is also one of the major U.S. meat producers so there will likely be some technology transfer from Brazilian ranches to their U.S. counterpart.

A major key to Brazilian acceptance of a mandatory livestock traceability system by Brazilian legislators was the simplification of the system of initially registering an animal and then tracking its movements from birth to export. The predecessor voluntary system in Brazil known as SISBOV is an RFID-based identification system with real-time electronic data collection and transmittal. While effective, this system is technologically sophisticated and beyond both the economic means and technological understanding of a large percentage of Brazilian producers. Embracing and actively promoting a simplified registration and tracking system by USDA, we believe, will go a long way towards helping reduce opposition to NAIS.

Even with all of these developments, make no mistake — NAIS is still on life support, and it may still die. But when the marketplace speaks and producers begin to learn the US is and has been a net import country, and no export markets are necessary at all, NAIS becomes even closer to true and lasting death!

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Politicians Soaked by Ignorance

Dec 23

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

National Association of Farm Animal Welfare, Dec. 23, 2009 — Ag.Ed@nafaw.org
Milk ProtestAround the nation politicians are making laws and enforcements about things they know not of. Such is the case with National Animal Identification, Ohio’s Issue #2 and numerous leverages to increase taxes and clamp down on farm production.
“Every man is a fool when he is doing something he don’t know nothing about.” Will Roger’s quote was never more true than today when the halls of legislation in Washington DC are filled with elected elites that have no understanding of agriculture. To play it safe, if you don’t understand it—leave it alone.

Tags: , , , , , ,

NAIS privacy not black and white issue

Dec 14

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

As NAIS becomes a less relevant, useless, bad USDA idea, BEEF Magazine, and other smaller circulation media, grope in the dark hunting some simple benefit, or some lack of pain to encourage NAIS implementation. A wheel barrow load of ideas have been falsely exploited wrongly promising virtues of, profitable source verification, export sales expansion, world trade compliance, useful carcass data for breeders, and even (ho ho ho) economy of application.  All of these fail to hold water, as this article reveals, the NAIS proposed data is “FOR PRIVATE USDA EYES ONLY.”  None of the above promises, virtues, claims or assumptions are of any value to US ranchers, nor ever were.  USDA has squeezed the NAIS purpose down to, “nothing more than information from a phone book,” according to USDA’s chief veterinary officer, John Clifford.
Snicker through this December 14, 2006 Iowa Farmer Today article, from their archives, resurrected from the dead, for the December 2009 issue, designed to entice livestock producers to fear not, and try to dance with NAIS one more song.  The thrust — bring in enough attorneys and it can be simplified enough to be palatable?    What!!!
Darol Dickinson, www.naisSTINKS.com

Financial Sense Editorials

NAIS privacy not black and white issue

By Gene Lucht and Jeff DeYoung, Iowa Farmer Today
Thursday, December 14, 2006 8:27 AM CST

Privacy has been a central issue in the debate over whether to make a National Animal Identification System mandatory or voluntary.

“It’s a legitimate concern,” says Doug O’Brien, a staff attorney at the Drake University Agricultural Law Center in Des Moines.

But, O’Brien, who also works at the National Agricultural Law Center at the University of Arkansas, says the issues are not black and white. Instead, they are shades of gray. Many could be addressed in the drafting of legislation that could be written to implement a national system.

“It’s fairly complicated,” O’Brien says of an ID program. “The ground is shifting on this.”

But, in the debate over a mandatory vs. a voluntary plan, privacy has been a driving factor.

John Clifford, USDA’s chief veterinary officer at the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), agrees privacy has been a central issue.

“Confidentiality is definitely a concern to the private sector,” Clifford says. “We will have the premises identification database, which is nothing more than information from a phone book.

“Federal law will protect the confidential information from disclosure. We will have access to that data in the event of an occurrence.”

O’Brien says that could be addressed in a mandatory system.

There are really two confidentiality issues, he explains. The first is over whether information about animals and their owners could be gotten from the government through a Freedom of Information request. The federal Freedom of Information Act requests would appear to apply to any information gathered by the government about animals.

But, O’Brien says there are nine exemptions to the act that are stipulated in the law, and several could reasonably apply to this situation. For example, there is an exception for confidential business information. Another protects released information that would make it difficult to run a program. These items have been factors in the federal price-reporting law.

Those concerns could be addressed by writing specific statute language that would prohibit such release of information.

The second concern is the potential for government agencies to share the information gathered for a government program.

Again, that could be handled through specific language in a new ID law or it could be part of language to be included in contracts between farmers and the government, O’Brien says.

There are privacy concerns with private ownership of information in a voluntary program.

Farmers might want to make sure federal code or contracts with those private groups would ban the selling of sharing of that information with private groups that might try to use the information for their private gain.

Tags: , , , , ,

FDA, FSIS TALK TRACEABILITY ~~ government agencies

Dec 13

Posted by admin in Food, NAIS | No Comments

from FOOD SAFETY NEWS DISCUSSION

by John Munsell ~~ 12-13-09

After implementing policies for many years which complicate, if not make impossible, tracebacks to the source, USDA/FSIS seems to indicate it is willing to consider a midstream change in its attitudes, and policies, regarding Tracebacks to the TRUE ORIGIN of contamination.

The December 9 issue of Dow Jones also refers to the upcoming January USDA hearing, but no specific date has been set. One of many concerns I have is that the agency may well attempt to produce yet another prosaic Notice/Directive/Policy which multiplies words, but accomplishes nothing, the primary objective being to disingenuously and piously portray USDA as America’s ultimate public health agency. The agency’s historical refusal to traceback to the origin is readily understood.

First of all, it is pertinent to note that E.coli and Salmonella are “Enteric” bacteria, which by definition means that they emanate from within animals’ intestines, and by extension proliferate on manure-covered hides. Retail meat markets (insert Lunds/Byerlys et al), restaurants (insert Sizzlers and dozens others here), and the majority of meat processing plants (review this century’s recalls) do NOT slaughter, thus do not have animal intestines or manure-covered hides on their premises. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the vast majority of E.coli and Salmonella-laced meat is caused by sloppy kill floor dressing procedures. Well, why doesn’t USDA aggressively trace back to the slaughter plant origins? If tracebacks were successfully accomplished which reveal that the contamination ORIGINATED at a slaughter plant, a public backlash would discredit both the agency and the slaughter establishments. Why? Because successful tracebacks would reveal (1) that the big slaughter plants continue to ship tonnages of contaminated meat into commerce, bearing the official USDA Mark of Inspection; and (2) the tracebacks would reveal that the agency is asleep at the wheel at the biggest plants, by official agency design. Why do I state that? Because the current form of meat inspection, which is called Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (or HACCP) deregulated the largest slaughter facilities. Prior to HACCP, the agency promised the industry that under the HACCP protocol, (1) the agency would maintain a “Hands Off” non-involvement role, (2) the agency would no longer police the industry, but the industry would police itself, (3) the agency would disband its previous command & control authority, and (4) each plant would write its own HACCP Plan, and the agency could not tell the industry what must be in their HACCP Plans. True to its word, USDA has fully lived up to its pre-HACCP promises, but only at the deregulated largest plants. In stark contrast, the agency has used HACCP to hyper-regulate the small plants. These differences are begging for a movie or book to expose the agency’s true intentions, which are focused on justifying USDA’s semi-retirement at the biggest plants, while hagriding small plants out of existence.

Today, 88% of feedlot-fattened steers and heifers are killed at the Big 4 packer plants, which enjoy political clout and the economic wherewithal to force USDA into paralysis. The agency lives in fear, knowing that if it attempts truly meaningful enforcement actions at the big packers, the agency will be defending itself in court, and for good reason! Realizing that USDA promised to maintain a “Hands Off” non-involvement role under HACCP, that it would no longer police the industry, and would jettison its previous command-and-control authority, the agency has knowingly painted itself into a corner which prevents it from forcing changes onto non-compliant big plants. USDA fully deserves to lose such litigation, and will, so chooses to avoid litigation. So, to circumvent this delicate problem, the agency has implemented policies (some of which are not written) which prevent tracebacks to the origin.

We should not be surprised when we continually experience these ongoing outbreaks and recurring recalls, because both (1)USDA and (2)litigation have focused its sanctions against the downstream destination facilities (restaurants, retail meat markets, and further processing plants) which have unwittingly purchased meat which was previously contaminated with invisible pathogens. Until USDA is willing to Force the Source, rather than Destroying the Destination, America is virtually guaranteed ongoing outbreaks.

USDA is totally opposed to putting Bill Marler out of business, and in fact is Mr. Marler’s ultimate ally by promoting the rights of the big slaughter plants to continue producing enteric bacteria-laced meat with virtual impunity. Why does USDA appear to have experienced a sudden change in heart regarding Tracebacks? I propose that since successful tracebacks have been accomplished for melamine-laced products, spinach to a mere handful of California farms, as well as tracebacks of lettuce, peppers, peanut butter, etc, USDA’s historical inability to traceback to the slaughter plants of origin has become monumentally conspicuous in comparison. And think of the irony of this historical fact!

Although FDA has inspectors in produce plants only once every few years, the agency has successfully accomplished these tracebacks. USDA on the other hand, has inspectors in every meat plant every day, yet is strangely unable to match FDA’s success in performing tracebacks. Perhaps the Obama administration is to be credited with the USDA’s born-again metamorphosis in its alleged desire to suddenly perform tracebacks to the origin of contamination. I can guarantee everyone one thing: we had best be closely watching every statement USDA makes in its January hearing, because the agency’s past performance in this area proves that USDA fears big packer clout more than it fears public health outbreaks.

John Munsell

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

States Need to take their 10th Amendment power back.

Dec 12

Posted by admin in Rant | No Comments

Dr. Edwin Vieira is right on the mark. I have been saying for a long time that the key to recovery in this economy is from the small towns up. We know that the federal government is incompetent, corrupt, and out of touch with the average person. When the mom and pop shops come back into the little towns and people resume trading locally, this economy will turn around.  Read Dr. Edwin Vieira’s article.   -Kidron

TEA PARTIES NEED TEETH

By Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
November 17, 2009

NewsWithViews.com

[The following is the full text of an address presented to the National Heritage Center for Constitutional Studies at its 2009 Constitution Day conference.]

The Tenth-Amendment Resolutions from State Legislatures, the Tea Parties, the Town Hall Meetings, and other manifestations of WE THE PEOPLE’S feedupidness with monkey-business as usual in the Disgrace of Columbia—even the massive congregation on the Mall last September—are some of the most enlightening, encouraging, and energizing developments that American patriots have witnessed in a long time. For these events are all premised on the idea: “We don’t want you!”—that WE THE PEOPLE do not want any more, indeed they demand a great deal less, interference in their lives from rogue public officials in the General Government.

These events notwithstanding, the problem remains that too many among WE THE PEOPLE will start but then stop right there, with “We don’t want you!” That is not enough.

The complaint “We don’t want you!” needs to go further, to the resolve, “We won’t have you!” — that WE THE PEOPLE intend to rid themselves of the General Government’s interference.

And to make this resolve effective, WE THE PEOPLE need to design and put into effect remedial action, so that they can say with finality: “We don’t need you!”

The sequence must be—

(i) We don’t NEED you!” which makes it realistic to say:

(ii) We don’t WANT you!” which combined with the ability to make WE THE PEOPLE’S wants effective will lead to the necessary and sufficient action:

(iii) We won’t HAVE you!” and finally will yield the desired result:

(iv) We are RID of you!”

If WE THE PEOPLE have the ability they can give “teeth” to the desire, take the necessary action, and thereby accomplish their goal.

But what will all of this require?

• WE THE PEOPLE need to create actual workable institutions that take advantage of the political and legal position THE PEOPLE hold—i.e., as the ultimate sovereigns.

• WE THE PEOPLE need to create actual workable institutions that take advantage of the economic resources THE PEOPLE command—that THE PEOPLE are the true source of all real wealth in this country, and are in actual physical possession of most of it.

True enough, the Establishment holds bundles of paper claims to wealth, many (if not most) of them generated through the unconstitutional Federal Reserve System. But the insuperable problem for the Establishment will be how to collect on those claims if WE THE PEOPLE simply refuse to honor them. Anyone in the paper-currency racket who doubts that these claims can be declared unenforceable should read the Supreme Court’s decision in Craig v. Missouri, 29 U.S. (4 Peters) 410 (1830).

• WE THE PEOPLE need to create actual workable institutions that are politically, economically, and legally independent of the General Government:

Institutions that can compete with the faulty and fraudulent mechanisms that rogue officials in the General Government have foisted on this country in the key areas of economic and political control, particularly in the areas of (i) money and banking and (ii) what is called “homeland security”.

Institutions that can replace these fraudulent control-mechanisms with proper means to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”. And

Institutions that will enable WE THE PEOPLE to defend themselves against retaliation from rogue officials in the General Government and from the private centers of multinational economic power.

In sum, WE THE PEOPLE must combine their economic resources and abilities with political and legal authority in large-scale organizations that will reflect the power inherent in numbers.

This cannot be done by or through the General Government at the present time, because the General Government is the main locus of this country’s problem, not the source of any solution for them.

It cannot be done through political parties, because parties (along with other factions and special-interest groups) are the control-mechanisms in the “divide and conquer” strategy the Establishment employs to prevent WE THE PEOPLE from asserting their political sovereignty in their own interest.

It cannot be done by individuals or private groups alone, primarily because: (i) private individuals and groups enjoy no independent legal authority; and (ii) there is probably no way to create a sufficiently large and effective private operation in any State, let alone throughout the entire country, in time.

It cannot be done by the State governments alone, because it is not simply a political question of governmental finance and administration, but will require a revamping of the entire private economies in each State, too.

Therefore, it will require both (i) participation by the State governments, because they have the legal authority and the ability to mobilize people in sufficient numbers, and (ii) mass action by WE THE PEOPLE as a whole.

The only establishment or institution that combines all of these elements is “the Militia of the several States”, the “well regulated Militia” that the Second Amendment tells us are “necessary to the security of a free State”.

But a true constitutional “well regulated Militia” exists in not one State in this Union today.

So, WE THE PEOPLE need to revitalize “the Militia of the several States” in order to regain and retain popular control over State governments, and through them to regain and retain control over the two fundamental powers of sovereignty: (i) the Power of the Purse—i.e., currency and credit, and (ii) the Power of the Sword—i.e., community self-defense.

Revitalization of the Militia will enable WE THE PEOPLE to exercise community self-reliance and ultimately true self-government in “a free State” with a sound free-market economy.

Americans need to combine all of the following elements in a single plan for mass action:

1. Revitalization of “the Militia of the several States”.

·The Second Amendment instructs every American that “[a] well regulated Militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State”—not just “useful”, and certainly not “optional”, but “necessary”. And not “necessary” in only some general sense, but specifically with respect to “the security of a free State”—which means that, according to “the supreme Law of the Land” itself, the very survival of constitutional freedom in this country depends upon the Militia.

The Constitution identifies no other establishment, institution, or entity as “necessary” for this vital purpose, or for any other purpose.

So why is not revitalization of the Militia, immediately if not sooner, “job one” on the agenda of every constitutionalist? How can patriots continue to deny in their actions what the Constitution tells them is “necessary” for the maintenance of constitutional government? Americans may say that they have faith in the Constitution—but faith without works is dead; and the Constitution is not self-executing.

·The purpose of revitalizing the Militia is to combine all the elements of each State’s “homeland security”—including police, emergency response, and so on—under the Militia, in order to obviate “top down” control by the police-state apparatus being set up through the Department of Homeland Security in Washington, D.C., and its various satellites, transmission-belts, and fellow travelers around the country. Revitalization of the Militia will return control to whom it belongs, in the hands of WE THE PEOPLE directly, with:

(i) total organizing, arming, disciplining, and training of THE PEOPLE to handle any emergency;
(ii) State production and provision of arms, ammunition, and accoutrements for the Militia—with all individuals to possess their arms and ammunition, whenever obtained from whatever source, as part of their Militia service—thus ending all of the General Government’s oppressive “gun control”; and, perhaps of most immediate importance,

(iii) assignment to the Militia of oversight over all new institutions of “economic homeland security” within the State.

2. Adoption of an alternative currency.

This is an idea which began in New Hampshire, and subsequently spread to other States, including Indiana, Colorado, and Montana. An alternative-currency bill has yet to be reported out of committee in any State legislature. But as the national economy melts down, the pressure for serious consideration and then passage of such a bill will become overwhelming, simply because there is no workable alternative consistent with the maintenance of America’s national economic sovereignty that can be put into operation in time.

The alternative-currency system will require not just the State to participate through its own public financial operations, but also will require every individual member of the Militia—that is, every able-bodied adult man and women—to participate in his or her own private economic transactions, in order to move both the State’s government and the State’s private economy as quickly as possible out from under the control of the Federal Reserve System and the rotten financial power-structure of the New York City-Washington, D.C. axis of fraud.

The actual silver and gold will be held: (i) in a State vault controlled by the Militia, and (ii) in the hands of Militiamen (the private holding of silver and gold will be as important as the private possession of arms). And,

Experts drawn from and subject to supervision by the Militia will be in charge of or will provide oversight for the system.

3. Establishment of a State Credit Exchange.

This Exchange will deal solely in so-called “real bills” financed with actual deposits of the alternative currency (no “fractional reserves”). This will be necessary in order to protect the State’s private economy from retaliation by the multinational financial power-structure, which will doubtlessly attempt to cut off credit to the State’s businessmen, farmers, and others, so as to sabotage the alternative-currency system.

Experts drawn from and subject to supervision by the Militia will be in charge of or will provide oversight for this Exchange, too.

4. Additional areas of concern and action could include:

Food independence and security through the suppression of multinational corporate agribusinesses.

Energy independence and security through mobilization of local resources and radical innovation in the provision of energy.

Assertion of local control over land and water usage, and other natural resources.

…et cetera…

All of these arrangements will be statutorily structured as functions of the State government and thereby extensions of direct popular sovereignty, and will be administered through the Militia, thus coming under the Second and Tenth Amendments’ guarantees of reserved powers to the States and the people.

5. Considerations for the selection of an initial State in which to bring this project to fruition.

In the nature of things, the necessary legislation will have to be drafted one State at a time. (No “one size fits all” bill is possible). Inevitably, therefore, this work will require the commitment of a great deal of time, effort, and expertise. Before such a commitment can be expected, let alone requested, of anyone, adequate groundwork must be laid:

There must be an extensive local grass-roots “freedom movement” in existence in that State and prepared specifically to promote the reform legislation.

There must be a solid legislative caucus in existence in that State’s legislature, preferably in each house (where a bicameral legislature exists).

There must be a workable plan, ready to implement and adequately funded, for mobilizing large numbers of activists from across the country to work in the targeted State to promote the reform legislation.

It is too late for parochialism on this subject: Everyone throughout this country has an interest in seeing this project succeed in the first State that undertakes it, because that State will be the exemplar for the others.

No one can deny that a crisis of overwhelming proportions is overtaking this country at an ever-accelerating speed. And each day appears darker than the one before it. But that in itself is a cause for hope—because, as the old saying goes, it is always darkest just before the dawn.

© 2009 Edwin Vieira, Jr. – All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).

For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.

He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals, and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and banking is the two-volume Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective. www.piecesofeight.us

He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political upheaval it causes. www.crashmaker.com

His latest book is: “How To Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary“ … and Constitutional “Homeland Security,” Volume One, The Nation in Arms…

He can be reached at his new address:
52 Stonegate Court
Front Royal, VA 22630.

E-Mail: Not available

Tags: , , , , , ,

Auto Dealers forced to close were Republican donors

Dec 11

Posted by admin in Rant | No Comments

This is very disturbing to me. There is growing evidence that Obama’s Car Czar forced out dealers who were Republican donors, but allowed Democratic donors to stay in business. Can you say Fascism? Remember that Fascism and Socialism are not diametrically opposite, but are both forms of Totalitarian systems. In fact, the  party who are the most recognized Fascists, the NAIS party, NAIS stands for: Nationalsozialist (National Socialist) Party.

Don’t believe me, check out these links:

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/05/red-alert-did-campaign-contributions.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/more-believe-that-republican-chrysler-dealers-were-targeted-2009-5

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/27/a-look-at-the-protected-chrysler-dealerships/

http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/dealergate_statistical_evidence_that_chrysler_dealers/

Tags: , ,

The Truth Behind Flu “Pandemic” Hoaxes

Dec 11

Posted by admin in Rant | 1 Comment

Ed note:   Found this article today and was amazed that the facts are all just laid out bare. Where is the news media on this story. Just yesterday, I saw on Breitbart that the Swine Flu has become such a pandemic that 1 in 6 people in the US have ALREADY had it according to the CDC.

How bad can a pandemic be if you have the disease and don’t even know it? Get over it naturally in a few days, and the death loss is no greater than the average flu?

I would say that the pandemic scare was a bunch of hokum peddled by nanny-state government bureaucrats who endlessly try to justify their jobs by micromanaging our lives.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9CGKOEO0&show_article=1

WHO ‘Mr Flu’ under investigation
for gross conflict of interest
author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order
by F. William Engdahl
December 8, 2009

The man with the nickname “Dr Flu”, Professor Albert Osterhaus, of the Erasmus University in Rotterdam Holland has been named by Dutch media researchers as the person at the center of the worldwide Swine Flu H1N1 Influenza A 2009 pandemic hysteria. Not only is Osterhaus the connecting person in an international network that has been described as the Pharma Mafia, he is THE key advisor to WHO on influenza and is intimately positioned to personally profit from the billions of euros in vaccines allegedly aimed at H1N1.

Earlier this year the Second Chamber of the Netherland Parliament undertook an investigation into alleged conflicts of interest and financial improprieties of the well-known Dr. Osterhaus. Outside Holland and a mention at the time in the Dutch media, the only note of the sensational investigation into Osterhaus’ business affairs came in a tiny note in the respected British magazine, Science.

Osterhaus’s credentials and expertise in his field were not in question. What is according to a short report published by the journal Science, are his links to corporate interests that stand to potentially profit from the swine flu pandemic. Science carried the following brief note in its October 16 2009 issue about Osterhaus:

“ For the past 6 months, one could barely switch on the television in the Netherlands without seeing the face of famed virus hunter Albert Osterhaus talking about the swine flu pandemic. Or so it has seemed. Osterhaus, who runs an internationally renowned virus lab at Erasmus Medical Center, has been Mr. Flu. But last week, his reputation took a nosedive after it was alleged that he has been stoking pandemic fears to promote his own business interests in vaccine development. As Science went to press, the Dutch House of Representatives had even slated an emergency debate about the matter.”1

On November 3, 2009 it appeared that Osterhaus emerged with at least the damage somewhat under control. An updated Science blog noted, “The House of Representatives of the Netherlands today rejected a motion asking the government to sever all ties with virologist Albert Osterhaus of Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, who had been accused of conflicts of interest in his role as a government adviser. But Dutch health minister Ab Klink, meanwhile, announced a “Sunshine Act” compelling scientists to disclose their financial ties to companies.” 2

The Minister, Ab Klink, reportedly a personal friend of Osterhaus,3 subsequently issued a statement on the ministry’s website, claiming that Osterhaus was but one of many scientific advisers to the ministry on vaccines for H1N1, and that the Ministry “knew” about the financial interests of Osterhaus.4 Nothing out of the ordinary, merely pursuit of science and public health so it seemed.

More careful investigation into the Osterhaus Affair suggests that the world-renowned Dutch Virologist may be at the very center of a multi-billion Euro pandemic fraud which has used human beings in effect as human guinea pigs with untested vaccines and in cases now emerging resulting in deaths or severe bodily paralysis or injury.

The ‘Bird Shit Hoax’

Albert Osterhaus is no small fish. He stands at the global nexus of every major virus panic of the past two decades from the mysterious SARS deaths in HongKong, where current WHO Director Margaret Chan got her start in her career as a local health official. According to his official bio at the European Commission, Osterhaus was engaged in April 2003, at the height of the panic over SARS (Severe Acquired Respiratory Syndrome) in Hong Kong. The EU report states, “he again showed his skill at moving fast to tackle a serious problem. Within three weeks he had proved that the disease was caused by a newly discovered coronavirus that resides in civet cats, other carnivorous animals or bats.” 5

Then Osterhaus moved on, this time publicizing dangers of what he claimed was H5N1 Avian Flu. In 1997 he already began sounding the alarm following the death in Hong Kong of a three-year-old who Osterhaus learned had had direct contact with birds. Osterhaus went into high gear lobbying across Holland and Europe claiming that a deadly new mutation of avian flu had jumped to humans and that drastic measures were required. He claimed to be the first scientist in the world to show that H5N1 could be transferred into humans. 6
In a BBC interview in October 2005 on the danger of Avian Flu, Osterhaus declared, “…if the virus manages indeed to, to mutate itself in such a way that it can transmit from human to human, then we have a completely different situation, we might be at the start of the pandemic.” He added, “there is a real chance that this virus could be trafficked by the birds all the way to Europe. There is a real risk, but nobody can estimate the risk at this moment, because we haven’t done the experiments.”7 It never did manage to mutate, but he was ready to “do the experiments,” presumably for a hefty fee.

To bolster his frightening pandemic scenario, Osterhaus and his lab assistants in Rotterdam began assiduously assembling and freezing samples of, well, bird shit, in an attempt to build a more scientific argument. He claimed that at certain times of the year up to 30% of all European birds acted as carriers of the deadly avian virus, H5N1. He also claimed that farmers working with hens and chickens were then exposed. Osterhaus briefed journalists who dutifully noted his alarm. Politicians were alerted. He wrote papers proposing that the far away deaths in Asia from what he termed H5N1 were coming to Europe. He claimed that migratory birds were carrying the deadly new disease as far west as Rügen and Ukraine.8
Osterhaus’ Avian Flu alarm campaign really took off in 2003 when a Dutch veterinary doctor became ill and died. Osterhaus claimed the death was from H5N1. He convinced the Dutch government to order slaughter of millions of chickens. Yet no other infected persons died from the alleged H5N1. Osterhaus claimed that that was simply proof of the effectiveness of the preemptive slaughter campaign.9

Osterhaus claimed that bird feces were the source, via air bombardment or droppings, onto populations and birds below, of the spread of the deadly new Asian strain of H5N1. There was only one problem with the now voluminous frozen samples of diverse bird excrement he and his associated had collected and frozen at his institute. There was not one single confirmed example of H5N1 virus found in any of his samples. At a May 2006 Congress of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), Osterhaus and his Erasmus colleagues were forced to admit that in testing 100,000 samples of their assiduously saved bird feces, they had discovered not one single case of H5N1 virus. 10

At a WHO conference in Verona in 2008 titled “Avian influenza at the Human-Animal Interface,” in a presentation to scientific colleagues undoubtedly less impressed by appeals to pandemic emotion than the non-scientific public, Osterhaus admitted that “A proper risk assessment of H5N1 as the cause of a new pandemic cannot be made with the currently available information.” 11 By then, however, his sights were already firmly on other possible pandemic triggers to focus his vaccination activities.

Swine Flu and WHO corruption

When no mass wave of human deaths from Avian Flu materialized and after Roche, maker of Tamiflu and GlaxoSmithKline had banked billions of dollars in profits from worldwide government stockpiling of their dangerous and reportedly ineffective antiviral drugs, Tamiflu by Roche, and Relenza by GlaxoSmithKline, Osterhaus and other WHO advisers turned to other greener pastures.

By April 2009 their search seemed rewarded as a small Mexican village in Veracruz reported a case of a small child ill with what had been diagnosed as “Swine Flu” or H1N1. With indecent haste the propaganda apparatus of the World Health Organization in Geneva went into gear anth statements from the director-general Dr Margaret Chan, about a possible danger of a global pandemic. Chan made such irresponsible statements as declaring “a public health emergency of international concern.” 12 The further cases of outbreak at La Gloria Mexico were reported on one medical website as, “a ‘strange’ outbreak of acute respiratory infection, which led to bronchial pneumonia in some pediatric cases. According to a local resident, symptoms included fever, severe cough, and large amounts of phlegm.” 13

Notably those were symptoms which would make sense in terms of the proximity of one of the world’s largest pig industrial feeding concentrations at La Gloria owned by Smithfield Farms of the USA. Residents had picketed the Smithfield Farms site in Mexico for months complaining of severe respiratory problems from the fecal waste lagoons. That possible cause of the diseases in La Gloria apparently did not interest Osterhaus and his colleagues advising the WHO. The long-awaited “pandemic” that Osterhaus had predicted ever since his involvement with SARS in the Guandgong Province of China in 2003, was now finally at hand.

On June 11, 2009 Margaret Chan of WHO made the declaration of a Phase 6 “Pandemic Emergency” regarding the spread of H1N1 Influenza. Curiously in announcing she noted, “On present evidence, the overwhelming majority of patients experience mild symptoms and make a rapid and full recovery, often in the absence of any form of medical treatment.” She then added, ”Worldwide, the number of deaths is small…we do not expect to see a sudden and dramatic jump in the number of severe or fatal infections.”

It later was learned that Chan acted, following heated debates inside WHO, on the advice of the scientific advisory group of WHO, or SAGE, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts. One of the members of SAGE at the time and today was Dr. Albert “Mr Flu” Osterhaus. Not only was Osterhaus in a key position to advocate the panic-inducing WHO “Pandemic emergency” declaration. He was also chairman of the leading private European Scientific Working group on Influenza, which describes itself as a “multidisciplinary group of key opinion leaders in influenza [that] aims to combat the impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza.” Osterhaus’ ESWI is the vital link as they themselves describe it “between the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva, the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin and the University of Connecticut, USA.”

What is more significant about the ESWI is that its work is entirely financed by the same pharma mafia companies that make billions on the pandemic emergency as governments around the world are compelled to buy and stockpile vaccines on declaration of a WHO Pandemic. The funders of ESWI include H1N1 vaccine maker Novartis, Tamiflu distributor, Hofmann-La Roche, Baxter Vaccines, MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur and others.

Not to lose the point, the world-leading virologist, official adviser on H1N1 to the governments of the UK and Holland, Dr Albert Osterhaus, head of  the Department of Virology at the Erasmus MC of Rotterdam, also sat on the WHO’s elite SAGE and served as chairman at the same time of the pharma industry-sponsored ESWI which urged dramatic steps to vaccinate the world against the grave danger of a new Pandemic they insisted could rival the feared 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic.

The Wall Street bank, JP Morgan estimated that in large part as a result of the WHO pandemic decision, the giant pharma firms that also finance Osterhaus’ ESWI work, stand to reap some €7.5 to €10 billion in profits. 14

A fellow member of WHO’s SAGE  is Dr Frederick Hayden, of Britain’s Wellcome Trust and reportedly a close friend of Osterhaus. Hayden also receives money for “advisory” services from Roche and GlaxoSmithKline among other pharma giants involved in producing products related to the H1N1 panic.

Chairman of WHO’s SAGE is another British scientist, Prof. David Salisbury of the UK Department of Health. He also heads the WHO H1N1 Advisory Group. Salisbury is a robust defender of the pharma industry. He has been accused by UK health citizen health group One Click of covering up the proven links between vaccines and an explosive rise in infant autism as well as links between Gardasil and palsy and even death.15

Then on September 28, 2009 the same Salisbury stated, “Professor David Salisbury, the department of health’s director of immunisation, said: “There is a very clear view in the scientific community that there is no risk from the inclusion of Thiomersal.” The vaccine being used for H1N1 in Britain is primarily produced by GlaxoSmithKlilne and contains the mercury preservative Thiomersol. Because of growing evidence that Thiomersol in vaccines might be related to autism in children in the United States, in 1999 the American Academy of Pediatrics and the US Public Health Service called for it to be removed from vaccines.16

Yet another SAGE member at WHO with intimate financial ties to the vaccine makers that benefit from SAGE’s recommendations to WHO is Dr. Arnold Monto, a paid consultant to vaccine maker MedImmune, Glaxo and ViroPharma.

Even more the meetings of the “independent” scientists of SAGE are attended by “observers” who include, yes, the very vaccine producers GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Baxter and company. In the past decade the WHO, in order to boost funds at its disposal entered into what it calls “public private partnerships.” Instead of receiving its funds solely from member United Nations governments as its original purpose had been, WHO today receives almost double its normal UN budget in the form of grants and financial support from private industry. The industry? The very drug and vaccine makers who benefit from decisions like the June 2009 H1N1 Pandemic emergency declaration. As the main financiers of the WHO bureaucracy, naturally the Pharma Mafia and their friends receive what has been called “open door red carpet treatment” in Geneva.17

In an interview with Der Spiegel magazine in Germany, epidemiologist Dr. Tom Jefferson of the Cochrane Collaboration, an organization of independent scientists evaluating all flu related studies, noted the implications of the privatization of WHO and the commercialization of health:

“…one of the extraordinary features of this influenza — and the whole influenza saga — is that there are some people who make predictions year after year, and they get worse and worse. None of them so far have come about, and these people are still there making these predictions. For example, what happened with the bird flu, which was supposed to kill us all? Nothing. But that doesn’t stop these people from always making their predictions. Sometimes you get the feeling that there is a whole industry almost waiting for a pandemic to occur.
SPIEGEL: Who do you mean? The World Health Organization (WHO)?
Jefferson: The WHO and public health officials, virologists and the pharmaceutical companies. They’ve built this machine around the impending pandemic. And there’s a lot of money involved, and influence, and careers, and entire institutions! And all it took was one of these influenza viruses to mutate to start the machine grinding…18

When asked if the WHO had deliberately declared the Pandemic Emergency in order to create a huge market for H1N1 vaccines and drugs, Jefferson replied,

“Don’t you think there’s something noteworthy about the fact that the WHO has changed its definition of pandemic? The old definition was a new virus, which went around quickly, for which you didn’t have immunity, and which created a high morbidity and mortality rate. Now the last two have been dropped, and that’s how swine flu has been categorized as a pandemic.”19

Conveniently enough, the WHO published the new Pandemic definition in April 2009 just in time to allow WHO, on advice of SAGE and others like Albert “Dr Flu” Osterhaus and David Salisbury, to declare the mild cases of flu dubbed H1N1 Influenza A to be declared Pandemic.20

In a relevant footnote, the Washington Post on December 8 in an article on the severity, or lack of same, of the world H1N1 „pandemic“ reported that “with the second wave of H1N1 infections having crested in the United States, leading epidemiologists are predicting that the pandemic could end up ranking as the mildest since modern medicine began documenting influenza outbreaks.” 21

Russian Parliamentarian and chairman of the Duma Health Committee, Igor Barinow has called on the Russian Representative to WHO in Geneva to order an official investigation into the growing evidence of massive corruption of the WHO by the pharmaceutical industry. “There are grave accusations of corruption within the WHO,” said Barinow. “An international commission of inquiry is urgently required.” 22

Endnotes:

1 Martin Enserink, In Holland, the Public Face of Flu Takes a Hit,  Science, 16 October 2009: Vol. 326. no. 5951, pp. 350 – 351; DOI: 10.1126/science.326_350b.

2 Science, November 3, 2009, Roundup 11/3 The Brink Edition, accessed on ScienceMag.org.

3 Article from Dutch, De Farma maffia Deel 1 Osterhaus BV, 28 november 2009, accessed in Hetonderzoek.blogspot.com.

4 Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport, Financiële belangen Osterhaus waren bekend Nieuwsbericht, 30 september 2009, accessed in Minvws.nl

5 European Commission, „Research“, Dr Albert Osterhaus, accessed in  Ec.europa.eu

6 Ibid.

7 Jane Corbin, Interview with Dr Albert Osterhaus, BBC Panorama, 4 October, 2005.

8 Karin Steinberger, Vogelgrippe: Der Mann mit der Vogelperspektive, Seuddeutsche Zeitung, 20 October, 2005, accessed in Seuddeutsche.de.

9 Ibid.

10 Schweinegrippe—Geldgieriger Psychopath Auslöser der Pandemie?, accessed in Polskaweb.eu

11 Ab Osterhaus, External factors influencing H5N1 mutation/reassortment events with pandemic potential, OIE, 7-9 October 2008, Verona, Italy, accessed in Oie.int

12 WHO Health Advisory, April 2009, accessed in Swine-flu-vaccine.info/.

13 Biosurveillance, Swine Flu in Mexico- Timeline of Events, April 24, 2009, accessed in Biosurveillance.typepad.com.

14 Cited in Louise Voller, Kristian Villesen, Stærk lobbyisme bag WHO-beslutning om massevaccination , Information, Copenhagen, 15 November 2009 accessed in . Information.dk/215355.

15 Jane Bryant, et al, The One Click Group Response: Prof. David Salisbury Threatens Legal Action, 4 March, 2009, accessed in Theoneclickgroup.co.uk.

16 Prof. David Salisbury cited in, Swine flu vaccine to contain axed additive, London Evening Standard, 28 September 2009, accessed in . Gulf-times.com

17 Bert Ehgartner, Schwindel mit der Schweinegrippe Ist die Aufregung ein Coup der Pharmaindustrie? Accessed in Profil.at.

18 Tom Jefferson, Interview with Epidemiologist Tom Jefferson: ‘A Whole Industry Is Waiting For A Pandemic’ Der Spiegel, 21 July 2009, accessed in Spiegel.de.

19 Ibid.

20 Louise Voller, Kristian Villesen, Mystisk ændring af WHO’s definition af en pandemi,Copenhagen Information, 15 November 2009, accessed in Information.dk/215341.

21 Rob Stein, Flu Pandemic Could Be Mild, Washington Post, December 8, 2009.

22 Polskanet, Russland fordert internationale Untersuchung, 5 December 2009, accessed in Polskaweb.eu

Copyright © 2009 F. William Engdahl
Editorial Archive

*F. William Engdahl is author of  Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation (www.globalresearch.ca). He also authored A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (Pluto Press). His newest book, Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order (Third Millennium Press) is now in print and will be available by mid-June. He may be contacted over his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.

contact information

F. William Engdahl | Email | Website

Tags: , , , , ,

Ohio Issue #2

Dec 9

Posted by admin in Food, Rant | No Comments

I just read this article here: http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/h/4047-is-hsus-going-buckeye-hunting

I am still disgusted by the passage of Issue #2 in Ohio. We are going to regret this, I promise you.

Here is my letter to their editor:

Dear Center for Consumer Freedom:

Reading the Issue #2 article. Everybody has this totally wrong. Issue #2 is what HSUS wanted. They only put up a token fight against it. In fact, I personally saw Pro Issue #2 signs right on the lawn in front of the Clark County HSUS headquarter building over near Springfield Ohio.

HSUS will end up with sympathizers or actual HSUS members on the new board because our governor will appoint them.

Your article said “Livestock farmers can expect a slow death by costly regulation”,
I agree, and that costly regulation will come from the board that is supposed to be farmer friendly.

We have one of the largest free range cattle ranches in Ohio, and this bill was shoved down our throats and people were blinded to the actual consequences that this bill will cause. We fought it, but couldn’t seem to get through to people.

This is how I see this bill,

–we changed our constitution so that our elected representatives can no longer vote on laws to regulate the represented.

–we put in a board of unknown people

–we put in a board of unelected people who can’t be voted out of office

–the new board can’t be appealed

–we don’t have a clue what rules they will make for us

–there never was a problem with “Safe Local Food”, I completely trust everything I purchase at the farmers market, it is the food that I get at Sams or Kroegers that could come from China and falsely relabeled by the USDA that I don’t trust.

Tell me the last food recall from a farmers market!

–I suspect that the board will be either controlled by the large packers and turkey farmers, or the HSUS, either way it will spell bad news for the little guy who can’t afford to comply with onerous rules.

This is a BAD bill and time will prove that to us. It will drive out the “Safe Local Food” in favor of the big packers, importers, GMO food etc..

Amendment #2 is nothing about “Freedom”

Tags: , , , , ,

An Open Letter to America’s Christians

Dec 4

Posted by admin in Rant | No Comments

By Chuck Baldwin
December 4, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

I was led to Christ at the tender age of 5 while sitting on my mother’s lap. I was raised in a devout, churchgoing Christian home. I have been in Gospel ministry all of my adult life (I am 57 years old). I have attended or have degrees and/or diplomas from 4 fundamentalist/evangelical colleges or Bible schools. I have been the Senior Pastor of a local Independent Baptist congregation for 34 years and counting. I have spoken in churches and Christian gatherings all over the country. I say all of that simply to provide my Christian credentials (in much the same way that the Apostle Paul provided his Jewish credentials in Philippians 3:5,6). As such, I believe I know something about the attitudes, conduct, philosophy, mindset, etc., of America’s Christians. I am not an outsider; I speak as one within the conservative/fundamentalist Christian camp.

As it relates to the rightful understanding of following Christ’s instruction that we are to be “salt” and “light” (and what that means for us Americans), and properly rendering to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s (and knowing the difference), there are basically 2 groups: those who sincerely want to help America maintain its foundational principles and those who, frankly, are too preoccupied (or cowardly) to give much thought to it one way or another. I would say that the first group is slightly larger than the second group. The problem is, among the first group, there is a vast void of understanding regarding exactly how we are to implement and carry forth the principles of Christian liberty–which are the principles upon which America was built, of course.

As I see it, there are two glaring obstacles that keep today’s Christians from being truly effectual and influential in helping to restore America’s freedoms and founding principles. And let’s be honest enough to admit that, for the most part, today’s Christians (including our pastors) are ineffective and irrelevant in providing any meaningful solutions to America’s many problems. Sadly, more often than not, we are little more than gullible pawns, which wily and wicked politicians use to advance their own nefarious agendas.

Obstacle Number One: America’s current generation of Christians has allowed itself to become pathetically ignorant as to the Biblical, Natural Law principles of liberty and government. And when it comes to America’s historical principles of self-government and federalism, the ignorance quotient goes up even further.

It is really sad: we Christians (including our Christian pastors) know virtually nothing of real American history, law, government, etc. For example, I’m not sure that we can begin to remotely understand what Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence if we have not read John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government. I’m not sure we can begin to comprehend the American philosophy of government if we have not read George Washington’s Farewell Address. Without reading The Federalist Papers, one cannot begin to properly appreciate the US Constitution and the principles upon which it was predicated. Without reading Pastor Jonas Clark, one cannot understand what really happened at Lexington Green and Concord Bridge. Without reading Alexander Stephens’ History of the United States, it is doubtful that one can truly understand or appreciate the principles of federalism and State sovereignty. And how many of us have read even one of the above? And this does not even scratch the surface of necessary knowledge.

Let’s admit it: today’s Christians, for the most part, are operating in a vacuum of truth and understanding. Without a firm grasp of necessary truth, how can we know what to do, who to believe, or how to act?

Accordingly, smooth-talking “conservative” politicians who know how to use religious clichés and terminology to gain our support and votes easily dupe the vast majority of sincere Christians. But it is actually worse than that. We Christians are, for the most part, unwitting contributors to the demise of freedom and rise of oppression in our land.

For example, Americans–including Christian Americans–lost more freedoms under former President George W. Bush than under any President since Lyndon Johnson, or maybe since Franklin Roosevelt. Yet, even today, most evangelical Christians continue to hold Bush in high esteem. They seem to be totally oblivious to the fact that Bush set the table and provided the opportunities for virtually everything that President Barack Obama is currently doing to advance socialism and globalism in our country. For the most part, Christians seemed to never notice that President Bush did almost nothing to change the course and direction set by his predecessor, President Bill Clinton. And liberals are just now beginning to wake up to the reality that, at the executive level, Obama is doing precious little to change the course set by George Bush–including escalating Bush’s war (now Obama’s war) in the Middle East. Will the American people never awaken to the fact that, for the most part, the only difference between these two parties at the national level is one of degrees, not direction?

At the national level, Democrats want to expand Big Government for the benefit of advancing the Welfare State, while Republicans want to expand Big Government for the benefit of advancing the Warfare State, but both want to expand Big Government. Make no mistake about it: neither major party in Washington, D.C., has any intention of returning America to the constitutional principles of limited government and federalism. But do Christians see this? No, they do not!

For the most part, today’s Christians seem to have the attitude that G.O.P. stands for God’s Own Party. That the Republican Party in Washington, D.C., is equally culpable for the destruction of liberty and constitutional government never seems to once enter their minds. The sum total of their patriotism seems to be voting Republican, watching Fox News, and paying taxes. The shallowness of today’s pastors and Christians is a major obstacle preventing us from doing much of anything that would actually contribute to good government.

Obstacle Number Two: Today’s Christians are not willing to support the principles they profess to believe.

I could not count the number of times that a sincere Christian brother or sister has asked me, “What is wrong with my pastor? Why does he refuse to take a stand?” or questions to that effect. Dear Christian Friend, as kindly as I know how to say it, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

I ask you, Why should your pastor “take a stand”? Why should he “get involved”? You and all the others of his congregation are more than willing to support his ministry the way it is. You sit under his preaching. You follow his leadership in the church. You give your tithes and offerings to support his vision for God’s work.

Look around you. What do you see? You see the Joel Osteen-type churches bulging out at the seams. Churches–where pastors are unwilling to get involved in anything “controversial,” where pastors are content to stay completely disengaged from anything that might be deemed “political,” and where pastors refuse to even hear the truth of what is really going on–are filled every Sunday. They have the largest crowds, biggest offerings, and most ornate buildings. Why, in the name of common sense, would you expect your pastor to “take a stand” or “get involved”? Why should he? You have–by your support, attendance, and offerings–clearly told him that you like him just the way he is!

Yet, throughout history, it has been pastors and preachers that have led the great civil movements and revolutions–including our own American Revolution. It is no hyperbole to say that without the leadership, courage, and resolve of Colonial America’s clergymen, we would still be a Crown colony of England, with no Declaration of Independence, no US Constitution, no Bill of Rights, and little freedom. And, it’s not like we do not have the same kind of lionhearted preachers today as we did in days of old, because we do. All across America, there are hundreds of Bible preaching men from virtually every Christian denomination who are more than willing to “take a stand” and “get involved.” As an example, go to my Black Regiment list and see the names of over 200 pastors who are out front in the fight for right. The problem is, the vast majority of America’s Christians today will not support these stalwart spiritual statesmen.

See the Black Regiment list here.

So, Christian friend, why do you continue to worship under the leadership of a pastor who has no intention of standing in the gap for our country’s freedom? Why do you continue to give your tithes and offerings to such a church? It is time for Christians who know and care about what is going on to GET OUT of these spineless churches! If you really believe the principles you profess, how can you continue to deny those principles by staying in a church that has no intention of teaching those principles?

If you cannot find a patriot-pastor of your denomination, look for one outside your denomination. I would rather worship with a man with whom I disagree on secondary doctrines (but who is firm on the fundamentals, of course), but who is willing to stand for truth and freedom, than worship with a man of my preferred denomination, but who will do nothing to confront the evils that are currently destroying our republic.

Good grief! We have thousands of evangelical pastors who are willing to follow a man such as Rick Warren; a man who has become a partner with one of the most devilish and sinister organizations in the world–an organization that is actively working against the principles of freedom and independence, and in support of the principles of globalism and universalism: the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Remember, it was Rear Admiral Chester Ward, former Judge Advocate General of the Navy, who rightly said, “The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all-powerful, one world government.” Most Christians readily discern any attempt at global government to be “of the devil.” Yet, Rick Warren is now an active member of the one organization whose major claim to fame is its incessant promotion of globalism.

How can any sincere Christian who is even remotely aware of what is going on–and who truly cares about the preservation of freedom–follow any pastor who follows someone such as Rick Warren? Yet, the Warren-type churches are flourishing all over America; and, at the same time, many of those congregants complain that their pastor is not “taking a stand.”

So, why don’t YOU take a stand by GETTING OUT of these soft, straddling, sugary, superficial, shallow, saltless churches?

It is infinitely more important that you be in a church that preaches the truth and takes a stand than that your teens attend “the most exciting youth program,” or that your kids are in one of these glorified playgrounds (called “children’s ministries”) so they can play games and stay entertained, or that your church has a softball team, or that it has the prettiest buildings, or that it has music you think is “just right,” or that it is the “premier church in town” for social gatherings or business contacts.

If you live near Phoenix, Arizona, why not attend Pastor Coleman’s church, 35th Avenue Baptist Church? If you live near Three Rivers, California, why not attend The Church of Kaweah, which is pastored by Warren Mark Campbell? If you live near Fort Myers, Florida, why not support Pastor James Riddle at Morningstar Baptist Church? If you live near Savannah, Georgia, why not support Pastor John Weaver’s Dominion Ministry? If you live near Ocean Springs, Mississippi, why not help Pastor John Mayfield’s Chapel of Faith? If you live near Kalispell, Montana, why not support Pastor Jim Huff and Bible Presbyterian Church? If you live near Omaha, Nebraska, why not support Pastor Phillip Kayser and Dominion Covenant Church? If you live in the Oklahoma City area why not help Pastor Jason Murphy at New Life Church in Collinsville, or Pastor Paul Blair at Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, or Dr. Steve Kern and Olivet Baptist Church in Oklahoma City? If you live near Greenville, South Carolina, why not help Pastor Tony Romo at South Pointe Baptist Church in Pelzer, or Pastor Mark Dibler at Bible Baptist Church in Pickens. If you live near Madisonville/Athens/Etowah, Tennessee, why not support Pastor Jim Headings at the Piney Grove Community Church in Englewood? Daniel New has a home church in Hamilton County, Texas. Clell Drumheller pastors Truth in Love Ministries in northwest Houston. Why not support Pastor Brandon Teague at Faith Baptist Church in Paris, Texas? Pastor Butch Paugh is a patriot-pastor in Nettie, West Virginia. Pastor Wayne Sedlak is a patriot-pastor who ministers at Reformation Hope Church in West Bend, Wisconsin.

These are only a handful of the hundreds of dynamic patriot-pastors across America who are truly “taking a stand.” Ask yourself, what could the Church do if, instead of Rick Warren and Joel Osteen, men like those listed above pastored churches that numbered in the tens of thousands? Imagine what could happen if Black Regiment-type churches were the largest churches in a majority of the great metropolises throughout America?

I say again (as kindly as I know how): if you stay in, support, attend, and give your offerings to these churches that are pastored by men who will not take a stand, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

And though I would prefer that everyone have a local church they could support in good conscience, there are hundreds of people across America who, because they cannot find such a church, worship online with me and my church every Sunday morning, as we Livestream our service. We do this specifically for those who cannot find a church that will take a stand in their area.

To tune in to our Livestreamed service each Sunday morning at approximately 10:30am (CST), click here.

If Christians today are to regain any semblance of relevancy in preserving America’s liberties, they must do two things: (1) immediately become acquainted with the foundational principles that created this country, and (2) get serious about supporting only those churches and ministries that truly know what’s going on and are willing to courageously stand in the gap. Anything short of this is pious-sounding rhetoric. And rhetoric will do nothing to help us–not now, anyway.

P.S. Educating Americans about their history is what motivated me to compile THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS. We are almost sold out of the current printing, and this is the final announcement. If you want to obtain copies of THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS, which contains 50 of the finest historical documents of American history in one volume, you must order NOW! Order here:

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2009 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved

Tags: , ,